Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: ghostofpig Date: Oct 21, 2009 9:14am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Tell rises to the challenge...

I always thought that the post modernist paradigm was simply an attempt to write more dubios dissertations.

What would Jaques Derridas say? Or Hillis Miller.

The "our" was one hell of a Freudian typo!

My "argument" on the other biard was certainly not post anything--sim0ly a post to indicate what asthetic particualrs of 4-29-71 pleased me more than 8-06.

Silly wabbit!

On that subject, really---the bottom line is that they really played the shit out of HtoH for about a year and a half. And choosing the "best" on is simply a matter of taste. And choice.

My God--to actually try to wrap a Grateful Dead debate in such scaret covers and call it your own.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 21, 2009 1:41pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Tell rises to the challenge...

Ah--a tenet of virtually all schools of thought within PM is that art cannot be judged. Thus, although I take your point that the finer distinctions between two versions of H2H might be taste, when I provided evidence that more folks selected one version over another, you seemed to suggest such things were impossible to judge, period.

Ergo, Post Modernity and you agree...that's all.

Say, you seem more upset about the PHUD market than elb!? You can't be that down on it can you? I suppose the folks in lit are sometimes a bit too much--maybe that's why the PM'ers really excel in that domain of the academy!?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnight sun Date: Oct 23, 2009 2:52am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Tell rises to the challenge...

William: this un-lit (or is it dim-lit?) isn't even going to gander a guess at any of that...but i will add this to the fray




Excerpt from the forward to Gordan Delamont's Modern Harmonic Technique:
"The development of the ear must be stressed every step of the way. Every note, every chord, and every chord movement must be comprehended aurally. Unless this is done, the study of harmony is meaningless. Experimentation, an open mind, skepticism, and - above all - continued ear training and listening are encouraged. It is well to remember that technical books deal with what has been done and not necessarily with what can or will be done."





Delamont's lessons and associated exercises are intended to allow the student to both identify and successfully apply sound relationships within a given context...not just to compose music that is merely "grammatically correct" but music that sounds like it actually means something

so, if the task of choosing starts with the sound (energy/emotion) in the composers or musicians mind, then by the same token shouldn't the task of choosing also rest with the sound (energy/emotion) that reaches the listeners mind?

technical understanding of music is only for convenience, not a goal in itself (applies to both musician and listener)

analogue>digital>analogue...the digital portion of the exchange is only one's and zero's

assuming that every mind is different, it is reasonable to expect the sounds both generated and received will have different effects on those minds

(man, that was really awkward!)



as a side bar, Delamont coined the term, "tonal vision" because he had yet to find another word or phrase in the English language that describes the musical sounds people hear in their minds

This post was modified by midnight sun on 2009-10-23 09:52:55

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 23, 2009 5:16am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Tell rises to the challenge...

"assuming that every mind is different, it is reasonable to expect the sounds both generated and received will have different effects on those minds"

Interesting stuff...I can see the above notion in a pure technical sense, but I suppose the "commonality" of human experience is what also impressed me at DEAD shows. EG, the band I have talked about, HS DEAD cover band, they were actually quite good, went with me to every DEAD show, virtually, and we talked endlessly about it...I cannot sing, do not know notes, etc., but we had fundamentally the same appreciation of Phil's bass and his playing, etc., etc., etc. Other kids were child prodigies, playing cello every day of their lives, able to pick out things I never could, but we still liked the same songs...same riffs, etc.

Not sure how that fits in with the singularity aspect he touches on...

Cool stuff either way.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnight sun Date: Oct 23, 2009 11:17am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Tell rises to the challenge...

so you're saying your musician friends heard more because they were exposed to and understood more concepts?

gonna have to think about that one for another year or so :)


with music, the pitfall seems to lie in believing that the technical aspect of the process is paramount when judging, or for that matter, creating the content, even more so for composition students because harmonic studies appear to be quite mathematical when examining note, scale and chord relationships (not to mention fretboard patterns, the nemesis of the guitarist)

imagine it would be similar to trying to judge (or create) poetry by the frequency and order of the letters chosen with little regard to the effect of the words, or judging fine art by only examining the brush strokes up close w/o stepping back to take in the view

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 23, 2009 12:17pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Tell rises to the challenge...

Good analogy...good fud fer thought too.

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)